Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-12-2003 Board of AdjustmentCITY OF IOWA CITY IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT March 12, 2003 WEDNESDAY - 5:00 P.M. Emma J. Harvat Hall - Civic Center STAFF REPORT CITY OF IOWA CITY Department of Planning & Community Development AGENDA IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WEDNESDAY, MARCH I2, 2003 — 5:00 PM EMMA J. HARVAT HALL, CIVIC CENTER A. Call to Order B. Roll Call C. Consider the February 12, 2003 Board Minutes D. Special Exceptions I. EXC03-00002 — Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Mercy Hospital for a special exception to allow off-street parking on a lot separate from the use served in the Office Commercial zone at 61 1-619 East Market Street. E. Other Update on EXC01-00028, 417 Ferson Avenue (reduction of side setback). F. Board of Adjustment Information G. Adjourn NEXT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING —April 9, 2003 agenda 2003.03.12 STAFF REPORT To: Board of Adjustment Item: EXC03-00002, 61 1-619 E. Market St. GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Prepared by: John Adam Date: 12 March 2003 Mercy Hospital Contact person: Steven Rohrbach Rohrbach Carlson 325 E. Washington St., Suite 400 Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Ph. 338-93 11 Requested Action: Purpose: Location: Size: Existing Land Use and Zoning: Surrounding Land Use and Zoning Applicable code sections: File Date: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: To permit off-street parking on a lot separate from the use served. To provide parking for Mercy Hospital staff. 61 1-619 East Market Street. 21,825 sq. ft. Professional office/residential, CO-1. North: Parking ramp, CO-1 South: Residential, RNC-12 East: Residential, RNC-12 West: Residential, CO -I 14-6N-IC, Off -Street Parking Located on a Separate Lot; 14-6W-2B, General Special Exception Review Requirements 13 February 2003 Mercy Hospital is requesting a special exception to locate a staff parking lot on property separate from the hospital itself. Access would be from the alley. Demand for staff parking has been increasing over the years as the operations have been growing. The applicant owns the property on which the parking would be located; currently there are two houses on the lots. Together the lots are 150 feet deep and have 145 feet of frontage along Market Street. 2 ANALYSIS: The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to promote the public health, safety and general welfare, to conserve and protect the value of property throughout the City, and to encourage the most appropriate use of land. It is the intent of the Ordinance to permit the full use and enjoyment of property in a manner that does not intrude upon adjacent property. The Board may grant the special exception if the requested action is found to be in accordance with the regulations of the CO- I zone, the general standards for special exceptions as set forth in Section 14-6W-2B, and the standards for permitting parking on a separate lot as set forth in Section 14-6N-IC. Staff analysis of this application identified two factors early on —one argues for a positive recommendation and the other not so positive. First, the neighborhoods near Mercy have had issue in the past with employees using the on -street parking on an almost daily basis; this parking lot would help reduce that problem. On the other hand, surface parking is not the most appropriate use of land within an urban neighborhood. This property sits within a mixed -use neighborhood that in addition to Mercy Hospital contains office uses, single-family homes and multi -family apartment buildings. It is also located on Market Street, an arterial street, that serves as an entryway to the heart of the city for large numbers of motorists and pedestrians. Large areas of surface parking tend to erode the appearance of streetscapes and may have negative effects on adjacent properties, such as increased storm water runoff, increased heat in the summer months and light pollution. These issues tend to be more difficult to deal with in denser mixed -use neighborhoods, such as this one, than less intensely developed neighborhoods where more open space separates parking lots from residential uses. The effect on the streetscape and adjacent properties may be ameliorated with setbacks, landscaping, proper drainage and control of lighting as discussed below. The applicant has indicated that it may someday develop this property as the hospital expands. Given the policy in the Comprehensive Plan supporting the preservation of existing neighborhoods, staff generally supports Mercy's growth in this direction, more toward the downtown, instead of a northward expansion. General Standards: 14-6W-2B. Special Exception Review Requirements. Since the specific standards for this special exception cover the pertinent factors, this report does not go into great detail on the general standards. However, some of them stand out for attention and are addressed below: Impacts on Use and Enjoyment of Neighboring Properties. The value, use and enjoyment of adjoining properties may be affected by having a parking lot next door. The house to the west on the corner of Market and Johnson Streets is an owner -occupied duplex; that owner has expressed concern about the appearance of the lot and people cutting across her driveway when going to and from the parking lot. She would like to see a fence in place, in addition to the required arborvitae hedge, to prevent trespassing and view of the parking lot. Until the hedge matures she will have nothing to block her view of the parking lot. Staff suggests the Board take this request into consideration. 3 Across the alley are a mix of single-family and multi -family uses. A daily influx of 50 or more vehicles, which may arrive throughout the day as different shifts come to and from work, will impact the privacy and peace of their backyards; views from their properties will be opened up to both a surface parking lot and Market Street; noise from traffic on Market will likely increase when intervening buildings and trees are removed. The maximum light fixture height allowed in the CO- I zone is 25 feet if it is within 300 feet of a residential zone, as this property is. Since the proposed lot is bounded on two sides by residential uses, a height reduction to 15 feet would greatly reduce the potential light trespass onto adjoining properties. The fixtures should be fully shielded so most of the light is directed downward and no direct light from lamps (bulbs) should be visible from adjoining properties, where it may constitute a nuisance. The neighbor to the west has expressed great concern about potential light trespass. Article 6N- I B- I i of the Code states that parking areas shall be pitched or curbed and drained to prevent the flow of excess water from such areas onto streets and alleys that do not have adequate drainage facilities as determined by the City Engineer. The Engineer has approved the drainage concept as it appears on the site plan included in the packet, but will have to approve the final site plan if the Board decides in favor of the exception. Comprehensive Plan. The final general standard requires consistency with the Comprehensive Plan of the City. The applicant has not clearly demonstrated how its proposal is consistent. Surface parking lots close to downtown seems counter to the preservation and reuse of the existing urban form, but staff feels that some reduction of hospital staff parking on neighborhood streets argues in favor of this lot, plus a general pattern of southward expansion toward the downtown is preferable to potential disruption of neighborhoods to the north. The Plan also lays out the goal of protecting the character of existing neighborhoods while creating new areas innovative in design and compatible with their surroundings; staff recommendations for screening and buffering are detailed below. In future, the City may want to work with large employers such as Mercy Hospital in developing incentives for increasing and encouraging employee public transportation use or carpooling as alternatives to surface parking. Specific Standards: 14-6N- I C. Off -Street Parking Located on a Separate Lot. The Board may grant a special exception for off-street parking and stacking spaces, aisles, and drives to be located on a separate lot when an increase in the number of spaces is required by a conversion or an enlargement of a use. There are also seven conditions the applicant must meet in order for the Board to grant the exception. Only conditions (1), (2) and (7) are applicable to this request. A copy of 14-6N- I C is provided at the end of this report for comparison. A special location plan shall be filed with the Board by the owners of the entire land area to be included within the special location plan and shall contain such information deemed necessary to comply with the requirements herein. Evidence of ownership shall be provided. A location plan has been provided that shows the layout of the proposed parking lot. Ownership has been confirmed. 2. Off-street parking shall be located as follows: a. In R and C zones, the nearest point of the parking area to the nearest point of the building that the parking area is required to serve shall not be greater than three hundred feet. The parking lot is within 300 feet of Mercy Hospital. c. In the same zone as the principal use. The parking lot would be in the CO- I zone, the same zone as Mercy Hospital. In assessing an application for a special exception, the Board shall consider the desirability of the location of off-street parking and stacking spaces, aisles and drives on a lot separate from the use served in terms of pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety; any detrimental effects on adjacent property; the appearance of the streetscape as a consequence of the off- street parking; and in the case of non -required parking, the need for additional off-street parking. The appearance of the streetscape is a significant issue in this application: two out of the row of structures facing Market on this block would be replaced by a gap 145 feet wide. Iowa City's urban streetscapes are defined by buildings and street trees, fences and hedges; among the improvements the applicant could make to the proposed parking lot would be the increase of setback, the planting of a hedge accented with different species of ornamental trees and shrubs, and the retention, as much as possible, of the berm along the sidewalk. Furthermore, two existing yard trees, both maples, could be incorporated into the parking lot design if a one-way circulation pattern in a counter -clockwise direction was applied to the lot. The City Forester believes both are healthy trees and, with a little care and the exception of very few parking spaces, they could continue to provide shade and vertical form for these lots. The applicant has also volunteered to save the oak on the northwest corner of the property. CONCLUSION: The use of these lots for parking is technically compliant with the specific standards for this type of exception but weak on compliance with the general standards. The landscaping provisions staff is recommending are designed to help reduce off -site impacts, but hedges and trees cannot replace buildings. Mercy has indicated that this site may someday be used for hospital expansion, so the proposed parking lot would be an interim use that has the secondary benefit of relieving some of the on -street parking in the residential neighborhood to the north. The plan contained in the Board packet was submitted by the applicant after meeting with staff, but it does not comply with the recommendations communicated during that meeting. The City Forester's recommendation is that each of the maple trees needs at least a 10-foot radius of open soil all around to have any chance of survival. A new site plan may be available at the time of the Board meeting. Staff cannot recommend approval of the plan as submitted, but could approve of a revised site plan if it complies with the provisions approved by the Board. Without the trees the applicant would not have adequate parking lot tree coverage, so that will have to be accounted for in the final site plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that EXC03-00002, an application for a special exception to permit off-street parking on a lot separate from the use served be approved subject to the following provisions: I. All parking spaces will be set back at least 12 feet from the Market Street right-of-way; 2. Within the setback area a continuous hedge of Arborvitae, Burning Bush and Amur Maple, or other types of shrubs or hedge plants, will be planted; the Arborvitae will form a backdrop hedge no less than or greater than 4 feet in height at maturity and the other shrubs will provide both color and textural variety, the final plan to be approved by the City Forester; 3. At least one of the mature maples roughly in the middle of the proposed parking lot will be preserved, if possible, with no less than a 10-foot radius of open soil around it and it will subsequently be maintained in good health; 4. In any case, the parking lot will conform with the tree requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, and; 5. Storm water runoff will be directed to a public storm sewer unless the applicant can demonstrate that direct discharge will not adversely impact other properties abutting the alley, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Copy of 14-6N- I C 2. Location map 3. Proposed Site Plan 4. Letter to the Board from Mary Stewart, 603 E. Market St. 5. Letter to the Board from the Northside Neighborhood Association Approved by: Karin Franklin, Dir, tor, Department of Planning and Community Development 14-6N-1 14-6N-1 etParking Located On A Sep- c. In the same zone as the principal t: The Board of Adjustment use, except nonrequired off-street nt a special exception for off- parking may be provided on a sepa- arking and stacking spaces, rate lot within the parameters of the aisles, and drives, to be located on a following pairings: separate lot from the use served when: 1) two (2) or more uses share (1) Multi -family and Multi -Family the same off-street parking and stack- (RM-12, RM-20, RM-44 and ing spaces, aisles, and drives; 2) an PRM Zones), increase in the number of spaces is required by a conversion or an en- (2) Commercial and Commercial largement of a use; 3) for housing for or Industrial (CC-2, CH-1, CI-1 the elderly in a multi -family zone, or in and 1-2 Zones), commercial or industrial zones, nonrequired off-street parking cannot (3) Industrial and Industrial or be provided on the property where the Commercial (CC-2, CH-1, CI-1, principal use is located; or 4) uses are 1-1 and 1-2 Zones); and provided located in a CB-2 Zone, and provided the principal use is established the following conditions are met: (Ord. prior to the special exception 99-3897, 9-14-1999) application. (Ord. 99-3897, 9-14-1999) 1. A special location plan shall be filed with the Board by the owners of the 3. Where two (2) or more uses jointly entire land area to be included within use off-street parking, the number of the special location plan and shall parking spaces shall equal the sum contain such information deemed total of off-street parking spaces re - necessary to comply with the require- quired for each use. ments herein. Evidence of ownership shall be provided. 4. Up to fifty percent (50%) of the parking spaces required for commer- 2. Off-street parking shall be located cial recreational uses, clubs, schools as follows: or restaurants and up to one hundred percent (100%) for a religious institu- a. In R and C zones, the nearest tion may be shared by financial insti- point of the parking area to the near- tutions, offices, retail establishments, est point of the building that the park- repair shops, personal service estab- ing area is required to serve shall not lishments and similar uses not normal - be greater than three hundred feet ly open, used or operated during the (300'). same hours. C. Off-Stre arate Lo may gra street p b. In I, ORP and RDP zones, the 5. A written agreement, properly exe- nearest point of the parking area to cuted by the owners within the area of the nearest point of the building that the special location plan, assuring the the parking area is required to serve retention of the parking and stacking shall not be greater than six hundred spaces, aisles and drives and binding feet (600'). (1978 Code §36-58) upon their successors and assigns, 1099 Iowa city -190- 14-6N-1 shall be submitted with the special location plan as a covenant running with the land. 6. In instances where a use is within six hundred feet (600') of a City - owned parking area, up to fifty percent (50%) of the required number of park- ing spaces may be provided in the parking facility. When a use abuts a City -owned parking area, up to one hundred percent (100%) of the re- quired'number of parking spaces may be provided in the parking facility. In the instance where an applicant wish- es to provide off-street parking in a City -owned parking facility, the Board shall substantiate that, with the addi- tion of the number of cars for a use accommodated in the facility, the capacity of the parking facility will not be exceeded. (1978 Code §36-58) 7.In assessing an application for a special exception, the Board shall consider the desirability of the location of off-street parking and stacking spaces, aisles and drives on a lot separate from the use served in terms of pedestrian and vehicular traffic safety; any detrimental effects on adjacent property; the appearance of the streetscape as a consequence of the off-street parking; and in the case of nonrequired parking, the need for additional off-street parking. (Ord. 99-3897, 9-14-1999) D. Screening Requirements': In addition to the applicable requirements for screening of Section 14-65-11 of this Chapter, the following screening re- quirements in connection with parking' areas shall be met: 1. Where a parking area is provided on a lot within fifty feet (50') of an 1. See also subsection 14-5H-5K of this Title. 1099 Iowa City 14-6N-1 abutting lot with a residential use which requires four (4) or fewer park- ing spaces, the portion of the parking area within fifty feet (50') of the abut- ting lot shall be screened from view within the abutting lot or at such time as provided in Section 14-6S-11 of this Chapter. .2. Where a parking area is provided on a lot within one hundred feet (too') across the street from a lot with a residential use which requires four (4) or fewer parking spaces, the portion of the parking area within one hundred feet (100') shall be screened from view within the lot or at such time as provided in Section 14-6S-11 of this Chapter. 3. The materials for screening and the placement shall comply with the regu- lations of Section 14-6S-11 of this Chapter.. 4. The Board of Adjustment may grant a special exception to modify the screening requirements when a park- ing area requires screening as provid- ed in subsections D1 and D2 of this Section, when neither the lot on which the parking area is located and the lot abutting or across the street is zoned RS. The special exception shall be subject to all the requirements of Section 14-46-4 of this Title and may only be granted when the applicant can demonstrate that modification of screening requirements would better serve the public interest than would strict compliance with said require- ments. Public interest may include, but is not limited to, reasons of public safety or aesthetics. In no case shall a special exception be granted to modify the screening requirements for a lot -191- M :W� i w: 603 Market Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 March 5, 2003 TO: Board of Adjustment RE: Mercy Hospital application for 611 & 619 Market Street FROM: Mary Stewart, property owner of 603 Market Street I own and live at 603 Market street, immediatly next door to, and west of the lots that Mercy Hospital has asked to convert from houses to a 53 car parking lot. I have concerns. both for the neighborhood and as and individual property owner regarding the development of this parking lot. I request your consideration of my concerns as you address the application. My neighborhood concerns are primarily in relation to the loss of existing character and use of the neighborhood. Once a parking lot is in place, this land will unlikely ever again be available for that which it is currently zoned. Has expansion of the ramp directly across the street been considered? As an individual property owner next to the proposed parking lot, I have several concerns: • I anticipate that a parking lot next door will have a negative effect on my property value. • In addition, it will be a much less attractive downtown living site for me. • My living environment will be affected because Instead of living next door to grass ane open spaces, I will be living next door to a large area of concrete that wil be lighted all night.. Presently, when I look out my north windows I see the Mercy Parking Ramp. When I look out my southwest windows I see Mercy Parking, and if this lot is approved, the view out the east windows will also be parking. • I anticipate quite an increase in the number of persons in the neighborhood --My "new neighbors" could be coming and going 24 hours a day assuming it would be used for the employees that staff the hospital 24 hours a day. Should you do decide to approve the application, I would sincerely request the following measures to alleviate some of the concerns I have listed above. Create a buffer of space, fence and landscaping on the west side of the parking lot (that borders my east lot line) that equals the dimensions of the buffer space on the north side of the lot. This would disquise the parking lot from my property and also provide needed privacy. Use reduced -glare lighting and place lighting so as to minimize "light trespassing" in relation to my property. Thank you for your consideration of my concerns and requests in relation to Mercy's application for a special exception to proceed with a plan for a 53 space parking lot next to my home. LEC EAVi'L�(�i` Pcb NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION March 4, 2003 Dear Board of Adjustment Members: At its February 27' meeting, the Northside Neighborhood Association voted to oppose the request by Mercy Hospital to build a parking lot where two houses currently stand at 611 and 619 Market. The COI zone does not permit parking lots that are not adjacent to the businesses that are served by the lots. The intent of this restriction is to prevent neighborhoods from becoming unattractive parking lots. Without such guidelines, what would prevent Mercy —or any other business not adjacent to a property —from buying up blocks of houses in the Northside's COI zone, demolishing the houses, and asphalting the lots? We are deeply concerned about what happens to the streetscape when houses (and in this case, some grand old trees) are destroyed to accommodate cars, and a once intact block of housing develops a gaping hole. We are also concerned about the aesthetic impact such destruction has on both the view from the street and on the immediate neighbors. This negative impact is compounded by the fact that the City will lose valuable tax revenue. The remaining homeowners will also find it more difficult to sell their homes as homes, undermining the integrity of the neighborhood. Two houses may not seem like much, but Mercy has demolished many before and it clearly plans to demolish others in the near future as well. We recognize only too well that Mercy has a parking problem. We urge Mercy's administration to take the long view and add onto its existing, adjacent ramp, costly as that might be, rather than be a bad neighbor and demolish more houses across the street from its existing employee parking area. Sincerely, Paula O. Brandt Steering Committee Northside Neighborhood Association 824 N. Gilbert St. Iowa City, IA 52245 354-6948 pobrandt@avalon.net EQO�EoeE IIli n ;, PCP MINUTES IOWA CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2003 CIVIC CENTER — EMMA J. HARVAT HALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mike Paul, Vince Maurer, Dennis Keitel, Carol Alexander, xxxxxxx Goodall MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Adam, Sarah Holecek OTHERS PRESENT: David Thompson CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Mike Paul called the meeting to order at 5:05 P.M. ROLL CALL Paul, Maurer, Keitel, Alexander, Goodall present. CONSIDERATION OF THE JANUARY 8. 2003 BOARD MINUTES Motion: Maurer moved to approve the January 8, 2003 minutes. Keitel seconded. The motion passed 6 - 0. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS EXCO3-00001 — Public hearing regarding an application submitted by Progressive Care for a special exception to share parking between two lots in the Medium -Density, Multi -Family (RM-20) zone at 603 Greenwood Drive. Adam stated that the applicants wish to share parking but cannot without a special exception. The property currently contains two structures and two parking lots connected by a common drive. The property owner intends to subdivide the property and sell the northern parcel with its structure. In order to comply with frontage standards, the planned lot lines will pass through the parking lot of the property intended for sale. The purpose of the exception is to obtain the right to share parking before dividing the property. Adam reviewed staff analysis of the application and issues that will arise with proposed exception. He also provided a staff recommendation that the EXOC-00001, an application for a special exception to permit off-street parking on a lot separate from the use served be approved with the following provisions: A sidewalk shall be constructed safely connecting the parking lot at 603 Greenwood Drive to the lot at 605 Greenwood Drive. 2. The use of the gravel parking lot in the back of Greenwood manor shall be discontinued unless and until the parking lot is paved to comply with the City Code. 3. A fence, wall or similar barrier shall be built to prevent the gravel parking lot unless and until the parking lot is paved. 4. The dumpsters on both lots shall be enclosed. 5. Right-of-way trees shall be provided at 603 Greenwood Drive. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes February 12, 2003 Page 2 Public Hearing Opened No one presenting. Public Hearing Closed Motion: Keitel moved to approve EXCO3-00001, a special exception to share parking between two lots in the Medium -Density, Multi -Family zone at 603 Greenwood Drive with mentioned provisions: a sidewalk constructed connecting the two lots; the use of the gravel parking lot discontinued unless paved; a fence built to prevent access to the gravel parking lot until the lot is paved; the dumpsters on both lots enclosed; right-of-way trees provided at 603 Greenwood Drive. Goodall seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. EXCO2-00022 — Public hearing regarding a correction of fact for a special exception that was decided by the Board at its December 11, 2002 meeting. Adam provided an overview of the exception that was approved on December 11, 2002. David and Nancy Thompson were granted a special exception to permit dwelling units above the ground floor of a commercial use at 1120 North Dodge Street. The Board concluded that a hedge for screening and buffering should be placed outside a future utility easement to ensure uninterrupted growth. The applicants have asked the Board to reconsider the decision because the easement was referenced as a ten -foot easement when it will be, in fact, only five feet wide. Also, the applicant wants to provide a handicapped parking space in front of the business entrance because of the nature of the business, prosthetics. The addition of a handicapped space will not conform to the condition that the screening shrubs be kept out of the utility easement. Adam provided a Staff recommendation to amend the prior decision to allow plantings within the easement following the planned improvements to North Dodge Street. Also, the applicant doesn't need to provide a handicap parking space given the small size of the parking lot, but given the nature of the applicants business, a handicap space would be beneficial. Public Hearing Opened David Thompson identified himself as the applicant. He stressed the importance of a handicapped parking space for his business and had worked with the City Planner earlier and had not learned of a problem with the easement and plantings until recently. He feels it's a reasonable alternative and compromise to place the planting buffer on top of the utility easement. Paul agreed that the addition of a handicap space is vital to the operation of the business and asked for any other questions. Paul thanked Thompson. Public Hearing Closed Motion: Goodall moved to accept the Staff recommendation that the December 11, 2002 decision regarding EXCO2-00022, a special request for a special exception to allow dwelling units above a ground floor commercial use in the Community Commercial zone at 1120 N. Dodge Street be amended to read "5-foot-wide permanent utility easement". And to amend the provision placing the buffer outside the utility easement to read "...the provision of a five -foot -wide area planted with shrubs no less than four feet on center and attaining a mature height of no less than three feet between the parking lot and the five -foot -wide utility easement, except for the area directly in front of the house, where the buffer may be planted an top of the utility easement". Keitel seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. OTHER None. Iowa City Board of Adjustment Minutes February 12, 2003 Page 3 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT INFORMATION None. ADJOURNMENT Motion: Goodall moved to adjourn. Maurer seconded the motion. Motion passed 5-0. The meeting adiourned at 5:35 PM. Board Chairperson data on atynt/pcd/min/boalloa02-12-03.doc --_JO L / Board Secretary